Bug 2237950

This package is required to build the documentation of the last update to python-doit

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6383648
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2237950-python-sphinx_reredirects/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06383648-python-sphinx_reredirects/fedora-review/review.txt

Please take a look if any issues were found.

---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed



===== MUST items =====

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
     Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "BSD 3-Clause License", "Unknown or generated". 9 files have
     unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/FedoraPackaging/reviews/python-sphinx_reredirects/2237950-
     python-sphinx_reredirects/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
     Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-
     packages/sphinx_reredirects(python3-sphinx-reredirects),
     /usr/lib/python3.11/site-
     packages/sphinx_reredirects/__pycache__(python3-sphinx-reredirects)
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
     names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
     Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
     one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
     Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
     license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
     license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
     beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
     work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
     provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
     %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 9935 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
     process.
[?]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
     provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on
     packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly
     versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST
     use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate.
[x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
     file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[ ]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
     Note: gpgverify is not used.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
     $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: python3-sphinx_reredirects-0.1.2-1.fc38.noarch.rpm
          python-sphinx_reredirects-0.1.2-1.fc38.src.rpm
================================== rpmlint session starts =================================
rpmlint: 2.4.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp57rwcnu5')]
checks: 31, packages: 2

=== 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 4.4 s ==




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.4.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
checks: 31, packages: 1

 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.7 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/s/sphinx_reredirects/sphinx_reredirects-0.1.2.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : a0e7213304759b01edc22f032f1715a1c61176fc8f167164e7a52b9feec9ac64
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : a0e7213304759b01edc22f032f1715a1c61176fc8f167164e7a52b9feec9ac64


Requires
--------
python3-sphinx_reredirects (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)
    python3.11dist(sphinx)
    python3dist(sphinx)



Provides
--------
python3-sphinx_reredirects:
    python-sphinx_reredirects
    python3-sphinx_reredirects
    python3.11-sphinx_reredirects
    python3.11dist(sphinx-reredirects)
    python3dist(sphinx-reredirects)



Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2237950 -m fedora-38-x86_64
Buildroot used: fedora-38-x86_64
Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: SugarActivity, Ruby, Ocaml, PHP, Perl, C/C++, Haskell, R, fonts, Java
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH

Comments:
a) You might consider using the newer packaging macros
b) May also consider getting source from GitLab to package the documentation
Examples of the above at:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/fed500/python-sphinx_reredirects/build/6387893/
c) Is egg info needed?

(In reply to Benson Muite from comment #3)
> Comments:
> a) You might consider using the newer packaging macros

I have used pyp2rpm that I noticed, later, that does not use the latest macros.

> b) May also consider getting source from GitLab to package the documentation
> Examples of the above at:
> https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/fed500/python-sphinx_reredirects/
> build/6387893/

I have used as the basis for the spec file. Thank you.
I took the change and I have added some features, like a single description, that I had initially planned-

> c) Is egg info needed?
This come from using the old macros, the only option would have been to remove that file after the installation.

So there is an updated version:

Spec URL: https://jamatos.fedorapeople.org/python-sphinx_reredirects.spec
SRPM URL: https://jamatos.fedorapeople.org/python-sphinx_reredirects-0.1.2-2.fc39.src.rpm

Created attachment 1987760 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 6383648 to 6388262

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6388262
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2237950-python-sphinx_reredirects/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06388262-python-sphinx_reredirects/fedora-review/review.txt

Please take a look if any issues were found.

---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Seems ok. To get correct permissions on the man page use:

install -pm 644 %{pypi_name}.1 %{buildroot}/%{_mandir}/man1/

Can do this on import.

Approved.

(In reply to Benson Muite from comment #7)
> Seems ok. To get correct permissions on the man page use:
> 
> install -pm 644 %{pypi_name}.1 %{buildroot}/%{_mandir}/man1/

I will noticed that after submitting. :-(

> Can do this on import.

I will do.
 
> Approved.

Thank you. Please take the bug (as assignee) or else the releng-bot complains. :-)

And yes, I realize that the button to take the review is above the QA contact. :-)

The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-sphinx_reredirects

FEDORA-2023-a818ddd78a has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-a818ddd78a

FEDORA-2023-c52c06d98e has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-c52c06d98e

FEDORA-2023-0b2dae425a has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-0b2dae425a

FEDORA-2023-a818ddd78a has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-a818ddd78a`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-a818ddd78a

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

FEDORA-2023-c52c06d98e has been pushed to the Fedora 38 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-c52c06d98e`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-c52c06d98e

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

FEDORA-2023-0b2dae425a has been pushed to the Fedora 37 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-0b2dae425a`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-0b2dae425a

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

This is a duplicate of the existing python-sphinx-reredirects package.  Please unpush the updates and retire from F39+.

FEDORA-2023-a818ddd78a has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

FEDORA-2023-c52c06d98e has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

FEDORA-2023-0b2dae425a has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Sorry, missed this.